16 Answers

I am fairly secure in my views, but am always open to new ideas and information that may change them. That said, I formed most of my ideas at a pretty young age, and have rarely (never?) done a 180 and completely reversed my position. I have broadened my views as I’ve aged, and acknowledge that there is a lot more grey in the world than I thought when I was young and naive. I love a good debate, as long as it doesn’t devolve into a name calling free-for-all.

Yea, I feel secure in my views too. One of my views, however, is that my views can always change.. I’m very okay with being proved wrong about anything. Still, I feel I’ve gained very very strong opinions over the years and I recognize that some are difficult to change but this is not to say that they could not change or that they should not change. In fact, I’m excited sometimes to think that maybe they will change soon. I almost look forward to it.. even though i love my opinions as they are.

If someone is insecure in their views, maybe they are too open minded about different things and their opinions or views might be easily swayed. This could be a source of discomfort for them resulting in the insecurity.

People who are more secure in their views could be that way because they have a lot of worldly experience and intelligence regarding certain things and they are quite comfortable expressing themselves about such matters.

If someone is adamantly opposing another person’s views, maybe it is because they always feel they have to be right or their opinion is the only one that matters most. This is selfish, in my opinion, and it doesn’t leave a lot of room for healthy debate between 2 or more people. As far as someone protecting themself from learning a new opinion, that could possibly be stubborness and/or irrationality in regards to not being open minded about different things. It could also depend on the topic being discussed. This line of reasoning might be a viable cause of why some people don’t like to engage in debates or discussions. Additionally, they might want to avoid possible chances of something deteriorating into an argument.

I feel pretty secure in my views and I can certainly be passionate in a debate where I have strong opinions on something. I won’t let it get to the point where others wouldn’t have an equal voice, though, in offering their own input because that really isn’t fair and it would limit the effectiveness of everyone’s contributions. I’m open minded and I always enjoy a good discussion/debate and especially on matters that I have a decent amount of knowledge about because then I can bring quality information to the table, so to speak, in these instances.

When I have a strong view, I am secure in it. Because I don’t have a strong view unless it is a subject where I have personal experience, then I share that experience. And will defend the position vehemently when it is negated by someone who has no personal experience and is merely quoting google or wikipedia. On subjects where it is simply an opinion, I am always eager and willing to listen and learn from people who have more intimate knowledge than I.

What views I have are entirely provisional. They’re no more than working hypotheses, always subject to revision, refinement or refutal. They’re interpretations that, while they may be true enough, are still just interpretations, and I don’t believe that any interpretation can ever claim the status of pure truth.

Things are in constant flux; trying to stake out a permanent position in this flowing reality is a futile exercise.

I’m not exactly sure what you mean by secure in your views. What you see is what you see. Do you think you don’t see it? Maybe I can tell you story so true that you change what you think you see? What do you think when you find out it is a lie?

With the opinions and learning. I’m not sure again what you mean. Again, truth is truth. What you think the truth is is what you think the truth is. Can it be any other way? If you are not sure of truth, do you not rely on the evidence? Do you not see only waht you see? Or do you see more or different from what you see? Perhaps you not trust the eyes?

I know what I see. I believe eyes. What else can I do? Enough to mistrust in people. Better to believe eyes. People open their mouths, and usually it is a lie. Watch them. You know what is truth if you don’t listen.

@Bluefreedom said: “If someone is insecure in their views, maybe they are too open minded about different things and their opinions or views might be easily swayed. This could be a source of discomfort for them resulting in the insecurity.

People who are more secure in their views could be that way because they have a lot of worldly experience and intelligence regarding certain things and they are quite comfortable expressing themselves about such matters.”

wowness.. sounds like you’re describing general fear of unfamiliar territory. like when you go swimming in a new lake or in the ocean and you feel an undercurrent. you don’t know where it’s going to lead so you kind of panic and run from it. (poor example, but it’s the first i coudl come up with)

Some people explore. Others stay hoome. Exploerers find out many new things. SOmetimes they get bit by strange animal they did not know is dangerous. Sometimes they die.

You stay home and stay safe. You know all the familiar. You don’t know what is outside your door. Only people in a rich country can do this. Everyone else must be explorer. You can not stay alive without exploring. Things change all the time. No place is safe, especially not inside your home, if you never look outside.

As a skeptic, I am pretty secure in my views, and although I am firm in what I will accept, I am not against looking at new ideas or information. As for debating, I don’t mind a little friendly debate, but when the opposing party simply rehashes old information that I have already explored and discarded as false, well, then what’s the point? Too often debate turns into the sort of thing that you see when ‘creationists’ take on people who accept evolution. Rather than give verifiable evidence, they pick apart evolution as being fragmented or inconclusive. Either support your own side of the argument with facts, or shut up. Attacking the opposing view point because there is nothing supporting your side strikes me as a complete waste of my time. Seems that this attack mode because your side has no evidence to support it is hardly worthy of bringing to debate. But hey, that’s just my opinion.

i’m secure in my views, in that i firmly believe in what i believe in. however i don’t close my mind to others’ views. i don’t appreciate when people are blatantly trying to disregard my beliefs as easily changeable and try to force their own on me, but i don’t mind listening to other sides. i’m firm in my beliefs, but i am willing to accept logic that others bring up, and ideas they offer.